The Partisan Attack 015 ' Secretary Robeson—Democratic Reform 3 * 1 . £>• T3i p aijd their Platfornj Exalted. p ^ MO&'Tj Speech of Hon. Jacob M. Thornburgh, Or TENNESSEE, nr THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, MONDAY, JULY 31, 1876 flu the Report front the Committee op NaVal Affairs. Mr. THORNBURGH. Mr. Speaker,months since when we saw the singular spectacle of the Naval Committee of this House sitting with closed doors, with the padlock of se¬ crecy on the mouths of its members, and saw a cloud of witnesses hovering around the com¬ mittee-room, composed to a very considerable extent of disbouest and discharged employees, disappointed bidders for contracts whose ef¬ forts to defraud the Navy Department had been seen and foiled, and persons of disrepu¬ table character, both men and women, some extremely partisan action like the report we have before us was easily foreseen. This se¬ cret star-chamber proceeding, after months of labor, have presented us a report which, without presenting specific charges against any one, yet throws a cloud of suspicion upon a large number of officers in our Navy whose gallant services in the past in the suppres¬ sion of the rebellion and whose unstained honor has made them the pride of the Navy and of the nation. The extraordinary propo¬ sition is heard from the democratic majority to turn over the four thousand pages of printed testimony taken by one committee of this House to another committee, in order that they,who have had no time or opportunity to examineit,may ascertain whether the Secre¬ tary of the Navy—a man of unstained reputa¬ tion heretofore—trusted and tried in other high official positions, has violated any law or committed any crime or misdemeanor for which he can be impeached. • The Committee on Naval Affairs in this re¬ port both directly and indirectly smirched his administration, and have left a cloud of charges floating indiscriminately over the heads of all the officers of the Navy. They have lacked the courage or ability to point out the law that has been violated and the man or men by name who have committed any offense. If the Secretary of the Navy has done anything to justify it, present articles 'of impeachment, and we will put him on trial. If he has not, let us have the courage and manliness to say so. But it is easily seen that the purpose is in the closing hours of this session to shirk all such responsibility and fair dealing, and turn it over to another committee who will be un¬ able- to report at this session, so that the truth cannot be known and the officers of the Government vindicated until after the presi¬ dential election. This I submit will be to strike a cowardly blow and run away. This proposed action comports entirely with the policy pursued by the democratic majority in this House throughout this entire session. This is a specimen of the kind of reform which the democratic party is trying to commend to the American people. This Naval Committee has been laboring in the in¬ terest of reform, not the ordinary kind which commends itself by pointing out abuses and proposing clearly defined remedies, but a kind of reform that can be only defined by calling it democratic reform, the sort of reform which forms the burden of the St. Louis platform. And, Mr. Speaker, as entirely germane to this subject, for this is purely a political and par¬ tisan report, made because the interests ot the democratic party demand it, I will take the occasion to examine somewhat in detail the reform platform democracy recently adopted and the kind of reformer they have placed upon it to bring a political milennium in these degenerate days. The following testimony, contained in the Credit Mobilier report, taken by a committee of this House, will show something of the kind of a reformer Governor Tilden is. In hi8 testimony taken by that committee Mr. Oakes Ames, the head and front of the Credit Mobilier corporation, said: By Mr. Hoar: Question. Why, instead of issuing capital stock to make up the balance of the Oakes Ames contract, did you not simply issue bonds or notes or other evidence of indebtedness of the company for the balance ? Answer. And not have any.stock? Q. Have a subscription of such an amount as you choose—large enough to govern the company only. You had some stock sub¬ scribed, $2,000,000, and 10 per cent, paid in, before yon started. I do not know that this has any bearing upon the case; but I wish to know' why it w«ns necessary to adopt this roundabout method of having the contractor nominally subscribe for a quantity of the stock. What advantage did you gain by the violation—for it was a Violation—of the law ? Tr—r.. ■■ —i ■ . . . , ■ , ■■ i.. ■■ it . . ■ n.. ■ A. Well, we wanted stock enough to vote on to control the road. , Q. But you have got nominally about $38,- 000,000 of stock there ? A. Yes, 6ir. Is that too much ? Q. I do not mean to intimate that it was too much; but is not the note of a corporation worth more than its capital stock ? A. It is not so good for the corporation, though, because they will have to pay the note, and the capital stock is good for nothing. Stock is considered the best form in which a company can put these things, because they ain’t obliged to pay anything on it unless they earn the money. Q. But suppose that precisely the same parties in interest had complied with the law which requires them to subscribe what capi¬ tal stock there was in cash and had subscribed two, three, or five millions of dollars, and issued the notes of the company, payable with interest at such time as they saw fit, why would not that have been better for the con¬ tractor and better for them, being at the same time a compliance with the law ? A. Persons engaged in railroads generally think that if they can get the capital into stock it is the very best way in which they can have it, because then they are under no obligations to pay anything upon it unless they earn it, while if they have notes and bonds out they must either pay or go to pro¬ test. Q. But that is in cases where the ownership of the capital and the ownership of the in¬ debtedness are in different persons. In this case you proposed to have the ownership of the capital stock and the ownership of the in¬ debtedness in the same persons substantially, who were represented by those seven trustees. Mr. Oakes Ames. If you will allow me I will say a word in answer to that. The stock would go into the hands of various parties; those trustees could not carry the notes, and when the notes got about into different hands, first one would sue and then another would sue. Q. Were you not informed by the counsel who drew the contract that this was a viola¬ tion of the law ? A. We were informed by counsel whom we consulted that this issuing of stock as a pay¬ ment upon the contract for building the road was in entire compliance with the law. Q. Who were the counsel that gave you that advice $ A. Mr. Charles Tracy, Mr. Samuel J. Til- den, and Judge Allen. Q. All of New York? A. All of New York. They were the par¬ ties that were consulted in this matter. Q. Was this contract drawn before or after General Butler’s visit to New York ? A. The Oakes Ames contract ^vas before, and the assignment to the trustees was after. Reform is needed, we are told, “to correct the omissions of a republican Congress and the errors of our treaties and diplomacy.” Re¬ form is always in order, and will be as long as humanity is aspiring and civilizatipn ad¬ vancing. Reform is simply growth, improve¬ ment, a change for the bqjder. There can be no question as to the necessity of reform. It should be sought for at all times by individ¬ uals, States, and nations. But who shall introduce it ? How shall it be brought about ? These are questions that peo- - - .. .. ■— i.nV i tt-A. pie must answer for themselves, and no party can claim that it has a special monoply in the field of reform. If a party persists in claim¬ ing that no other party can bring about re¬ form, the people will naturally ask in what special instance has it shown peculiar fitness as a reformer. If this question should be asked the democratic party, what single in¬ stance could it cite that would satisfy the peo¬ ple that its claim was well founded ? I know of none. The democratic platform opens with the assertion that it is demanded. The republican part^ has been practicing it for the past fifteen years. Reform, we are told from the St. Louis platform, is needed to rebuild and establish in the hearts of the whole people the Union. If this had read “rebuild and establish the Union in the democratic party” it would have been to the point. The Union was rebuilt years ago, and has been established as firm as a rock in the ^hearts of republicans through¬ out the land. Apply the reform spirit where it is needed, among those who have hated the Union and who still act as if their hatred con¬ tinued, and the world will applaud this plank. Reform is necessary, they say, “to estab¬ lish a sound currency, restore the public credit, and maintain the national honor.” If this democratic platform did not so state, no one would believe it. A sound currency? When was the people blessed with a sounder one ? Who has lost a dollar by the bill of a broken national bank ? The work of the counterfeiter has been almost destroyed; from Maine to California the peopler are fa¬ miliar with the currency; imposition is almost impossible. The currency is sound, the soundest we ever had, and the republican party has paved the way, and, if not interfer¬ ed with, hope to make it by 1879 as good as gold and the soundest currency in the world. “Restore the public credit?” Why it never was lost. It stands high to-day in the mar¬ kets of the world. It stands better than ever before in our history. NaState governed by the democratic party can begin to compare with it in credit. Even the best State stocks of New York, a State governed by the man who has been selected to restore a credit that never was lost, fall below it; while the credit of the Southern States, sapped of their vitality by democratic misrule, has sunk so low that it almost causes a blush when we read the quotations. But the national credit stands high, thanks td the wisdom, the ability, the integrity of the republican party. Reform of the credit of the Government! Would that this same partv now howling so lustily this battle-cry had practiced a little of what they profess in my own State, where they are and have been for years in power, and have dishonored her fair name by almost hopelessly ruining her credit, leaving her ob¬ ligations unpaid, allowing her debt and in¬ terest thereon to accumulate until already some of their own reform party are threaten¬ ing the eternal disgrace of the whole people of one of the noblest and proudest States in this Union by repudiation. The}' have par¬ alyzed her energies, cripjjled her resources, manipulated her bonded debt in the interest of democratic cliques and rings until her bonds are now quoted at forty-four cents on the dollar, and still no preparations for re¬ form can we see in the future. Tennessee is not the only State in the South 3 where the people have seen some of the beauties of democratic financial reform. The State of Texas is democratic in every department, and the San Antonio Herald is one of the leading democratic organs, and will not be suspected of falsehood or even of exaggeration. It says: In our ^Legislature the characteristic fea¬ tures are waste and extravagance. Offices are multiplied, salaries are increased, and the people’s domain squandered in the most reckless manner; but the sacred trust, the school fund, amounting to $800,000, commit¬ ted to their fiduciary care, is also violently seized,and appropriated to the payment of mileage and per diem. This, let it be it remembered, is done by the men who are clamorous for Tilden and bis sort of reform. Nor is this the worst of the case. Under republican rule the State expenses were about $300,000; now they are nearly two millions. In its issue of July 8th the San Antonio Herald says boldly: Our State government is a curse and our laws are a mockery. By the apathy of the State government anarchy prevails and law¬ lessness and crime abound. The people must act in their own defense; the governor and Legislature will not. This is a picture of democratic reform drawn by a democratic pen. Other instances of democratic reform of the same kind, where they have exercised full power, could be cited. It is enough to say these given are the rule and not the exception of the kind of democratic reform the States have enjoyed under democracy. In order to show that this cry of “reform in our national credit” is wholly for political effect, I will give the quotations of our national, securities at the stock exchange in New York: U. S. loan 6 per cent, registered, 1881. 119% 6 per cent, coupon, 1881. 120% 5-20 registered, 1865. 116% 5-20 coupon, 1865. 116% 5-20 registered, new issue, 1865. 117% 5-20 coupon, new issue, 1865- 117% 5-20 registered, 1867. 119% 5-20 coupon, 1867.ll!»% 5-20 registered, 1868. 131% 5-20 coupon, 1868. 121% 10-40 registered.117% 10-40 coupon. 118% 5’s registered, 1881.116% G’s coupon, 1881.117% 6’s currency, 1895-99. 125% American gold.111% But they say also in their platform they want to come into 'po wer “to maintain the national honor.” When did the national honor stand higher than to-day? Where is the nation, great or small, that does not re¬ spect the United States more to-day than ever before? England does; France "does; Ger¬ many does; Russia does; all the great powers look up to us as never before in our career If any disrespect has been shown our national honor, it has been by our own people, by the commission of lawless acts in the Southern States in defiance of national authority and the common pleadings of humanity. With a sound currency, with good credit everywhere, and with a national honor equal to the most favored nation, how supremely foolish sound these partisan denunciations which were breathed at St. Louis and put to¬ gether and called a platform, denouncing as a failure what the people know to have been a success and what the historian will record as the grandest financial success of the cen¬ tury; denouncing as financial imbecitity ant party immorality a currency system which has made it possible for the nation to meet its heavy obligations Avithout disturbing the busi¬ ness interests of a single community or trench¬ ing upon the rights of a single individual. If this system, which has given the nation a uni¬ form currency, is the result of financial imbe¬ cility, what, I would ask in the name of rea¬ son, constitutes financial wisdom? But the eagerness of all classes, high and low, rich and poor, republicans and democrats, to se cure a share of this currency and to hold fast to it when other values are gladly surrender¬ ed gives the lie to this charge and proves to my satisfaction that, no matter what is said in this platform, those who made it do not believe in the truth of what they uttered. A sound currency, that we are all glad to get and sorry to part with; over $600,000,000 paid on the national debt; internal taxes re¬ duced in 'amount from $309,236,818.42 in 1866 to $110,007,493.58 in 1875; our national securities higher than ever and sought after by the capitalists of the whole world, are items in the financial policy of the republican party that challenge the admiration of the American people. The St. Louis denuncia¬ tions are but empty sounds, devoid of truth, and lacking the semblance of plausibility. The platform can scarcely be called a “decla¬ ration of principles,” but would be better .suited for a violent partisan campaign docu¬ ment, if it Avere not false in its statement of facts, false jn its theories, and false in its conclusions; for even a campaign document ought to be true in all these respects. WhileT am not among the older and more experienced members of this body, I have lived long enough to see the majority of the people in districts and States deluded as were “the children of Israel when God sent upon them a strong delusion that they might be¬ lieve a lie.” The masses in the Southern States could never have otherwise been led by their political orators and newspapers into rebellion; that the theories and principles which they taught were fallacious, and the hopes they inspired were a delusion and a fraud, no one can now deny. Only two years ago democratic orators made themselves hoarse, and democratic newspapers were frantic at the untold and unceasing miseries that would be forever en¬ tailed upon the American people should the “civil rights bill” become a law. In many sections of the country the public mind was excited. The vivid pictures so artfully drawn of the great national calamities to follow the passage of that measure deceived many hon¬ est men, and to this fraud and delusion many gentlemen on the other side of this Chamber are permitted to hold their seats in this House to-day. The bill did become a law. Who has felt any of the fearful evils so viv¬ idly pictured? And now, having gained a majority in one House of Congress by delud¬ ing and deceiving the people upon false issues, false in fact, false in theory, and false in conclusions, they reneAV their efforts to manufacture other material of the same character for the coming campaign. Unable or unwilling to go into the contest on issues which are real, tangible, pertinent to the public interests, needing discussion and future action by whatever party shall be in power, they have gone vigorously to work and have wasted months of this session of Congress, prolonged the session, and spent nearly hall 4 \ a million dollars of the people’s money in endeavoring to find a slender pretense on the evidence of witnesses, many of whom would not be believed in a court of justice, to charge extravagance upon the republican party and corruption on its favorite leaders. They hope again by such tactics to delude and de¬ ceive enough of the people to control the elections by an unceasing howl of extrava¬ gance and corruption, by wholesale slander against republican officials, and then with un¬ blushing impudence present democracy as a reform party, and a Tammany-hall leader, the former colleague of Tweed & Co., and the attorney and adviser of Credit Mobilier swindles, as the great reformer ®f the age. But to return to their platform. Reform is necessary to secure the resumption of specie payments, is it ? I think not; for the day has been already decided fipon, and no claim has yet been made that it is too far Off. Can democracy secure it sooner? It makes no such pretension. It simply de¬ nounces the republican party for taking no steps in that direction, and yet with its usual consistency demands the immediate repeal of the only practical measure that it has taken. In other words, it condemns it for not doing a certain thing and then denounces it for doing that very thing. Well may we exclaim, “Humbug, thy name is democratic reform! ” Reform is necessary to secure a better sys¬ tem of finance than we now enjoy. What is this better system ? Can any one tell ? The platform of the democratic party is not very explicit. It says, in the language of a Ches¬ terfield and the ambiguity of the Chinese tongue: We believe such a system, well devised and above all intrusted to competent hands for execution, creating at no time an artifi¬ cial scarcity of currency and at no time alarming the public mind into a withdrawal of that vaster machinery of credit by which 95 per cent, of all business transactions are f >erformed, a system open to the public and nspiring general confidence, would from the day of its adoption bring healing on its wings to all our paralyzed industry, set in motiop the wheels of commerce, manufac¬ tures, and other mechanic arts, and renew in all its natural sources the prosperity of the people. This is all very pleasing, but what is this system that is to bring healing on its wings to all our paralyzed industry, set in motion the wheels of commerce, manufactures, and other mechanic arts, and renew in all its natural sources the prosperity of the people ? Why has it not been brought forward by the majority of this House ? Is it to be kept a profound secret ? Have letters-patent been ap¬ plied for or a caveat filed to protect the inven¬ tor? Let us have it now, for if it is all that is claimed for it, there will be no “dead lock” on its passage. Come, O system of Utopian promise ! come with healing on your wings ! Is there a democrat on this floor who can refuse this splendid opportunity to im¬ mortalize his name by introducing this magi¬ cal system, born of the angels but now un¬ fortunately under the especial guardianship of the democratic party? There is no such system, and none know it better than the very gentlemen who penned those brilliant, worth¬ less promises. If I am wrong in the state¬ ment, will the democratia Committee on Banking and Currency tell us what this sys¬ tem is ? If it is known it can be described. If it cannot be described, then it is not worth the language thrown away upon it. If it stands to finance as the Keeley motor does to mechanics, then let us know all about it or cease to further humbug the public. We are told that reform is needed “in tho aim and mode” of Federal taxation. The aim of Federal taxation is to secure money enough to pay the expenses of the Govern¬ ment. Is not the aim a laudable one ? Where can reform be applied to this ? The mode of Federal taxation may be a fair question for debate, but the present mode is certainly not “a masterpiece of injustice,” as it has been called. The people have recognized it as the best possible under the circumstances. It would be pleasing if it could be abolished with¬ out injury to the public interests, but it can¬ not be. The expenditures which have grown out of the rebellion must be met. Large rev¬ enues have become a necessity. No honest man would repudiate our national obligations. Therefore our internal-revenue tax must con¬ tinue to be collected, though it may be possi¬ ble to somewhat simplify the mode of col¬ lecting it. This I have endeavored to do, so that in sparsely populated sections of the country those who desire to manufacture spirits and raise tobacco on a small scale may be enabled to do so and avoid the harsh and rigorous provisions of the law made to con¬ trol the immense establishments of other sec¬ tions. But for eight months our democratic Committee of Ways and Means have been unable to reform , or to propose or agree to any measure which will reform, either the mode or the aim of collecting the internal-rev¬ enue taxes. If there is a better way, give it to the people. Bills are introduced and buried in the committee. Eight months is certainly long enough to devise some means, if any ex¬ ist, in the mode of assessing and collecting internal-revenue taxes; either present us one or cease this cry of demagogism. Again, we are told that reform is necessary in the scale of public expenses, Federal, State, and municipal, and to give force to this asser¬ tion we are told that “our Federal taxation has swollen from $60,000,000 gold in 1860 to $150,000,000 currency in 1870; our aggregate taxation from $154,000,000gold in 1860 to$7 i 30,- 000,000 currency in 1870, or in one decade from less than $5 per head to more than $18 per head.” I know nothing about the cor¬ rectness of these figures, but I do know, and the democrats know, the cause of this large increase. It represents the price paid by the pepple for the Union. Is it worth the money expended? If it is, and I believe it is, then the burden imposed upon us should be borne cheerfully, and I have faith enough in the American people to believe that it will be. But, Mr. Speaker, it provokes both a smile and a feeling of indignation to hear the charge made against the republican party by the democracy that the expenses of the Govern¬ ment are increased and too great, that taxes are burdening the people, that there are too many clerks and employees in the Depart¬ ments, and our wicked^ extravagance has brought it about. Do they think the memory of the American people is so short as to for¬ get that the democratic party of the South entered into a four years’ rebellion, and was aided qnd encouraged by many of their north¬ ern brethren'who are co-operating with them 5 to-day? Do they suppose the people do not know that billions of treasure was a part of the price we paid to preserve the union of the States and make this happy centennial rejoicing possible ? Do they not know who laid these burdens that are so hard to bear on our shoulders? We pay to-day about ninety millions interest on the money we bor¬ rowed to put down the rebellion. We pay about thirty millions more in pensions to dis¬ abled Union soldiers, their widows and or¬ phans; we pay many millions more to officers of the regular Army on the retired list; for the examination and payment of claims for supplies t%ken; increase of clerical force to regulate and preserve the enormous records accumulating from a four years’ war with two millions of men on the rolls—all this growing directly out of the rebellion. Yet the men engaged in that rebellion and those in full sympathy with them then as now are loudest in bitter denunciation of the extrava¬ gance of the republican party; or to quot the language of an able Senator, they tell us— You republicans did not conquer our re¬ bellion quite as cheaply as you ought to have done; you have not handled taxation and the public debt and the other conse¬ quences growing out of our treason as well as you ought to have done. Therefore we are indignant about it. You ought to have done this business better; you ought to have whipped us at half the expense, and you did not. We propose to take the Government out of your hands and ourselves to settle with and deal with the consequences of our own Crimes and blunders. Municipal reform and economy are neces¬ sary. No one doubts it. The city of New York is an example of this need. What re¬ form has democracy instituted there ? It has had an undisputed field. What has it ac¬ complished ? It has ’ increased the citv debt from $36,000,000 in 1867 to over $132,000,000 in 1876. Yet there has been no war to carry on, no extraordinary expenses to meet. Is this the kind of reform democracy would bring to the nation ? If it is, our national debt would be nearly $10,000,000,000 before the close of a single term of democratic con¬ trol. If democracy has done better than this in any other city where it has had control, let us have the name of the city and the charac¬ ter of the reform established. As for the practice of economy in public expenditures, I believe in it. The republican party practice it. But saving money does not always indicate economy. You may re¬ fuse to build a light-house where one is need¬ ed and thereby save a few thousands of dol¬ lars, but you inflict an injury on commerce and on humanity which cannot be calculated in dollars and cents. You may refuse to fin¬ ish a public building and thereby keep a few thousands in the Treasury, but the work is needed and must some time be executed. Yon have simply postponed payment. There is no economy in that. You may cut down your appropriation bills several millions, but you risk a serious injury to the public service which you have no right to incur. You may stop public improvements, discharge mechan¬ ics and laborers, shut up factories and work¬ shops engaged on public works, and may call this economy, but it is not economy. You have set an example for those who have money and ought to spend it to withhold ex¬ penditures, ,shut down on labor, and thus you have contributed to the general stagnation of business. Is this economy? You may call it economy, but the people next November will call it by its right name, political stupidity. You may cut down the pay of the over¬ worked and faithful letter-carriers, who serve the people early and late, through sunshine and storm, exposed to the fierce heat of Sum¬ mer and the extreme cold of Winter, but this is not economy; it is legalized injustice, and will be so regarded when the people come to render their verdict. You may reduce salaries established when democracy was in power, and then none too large, when gold was the currency of the land and when every article entering into house¬ hold consumption was cheaper than now; but this is not economy, it is simply parsimony uncalled for by any exigency of the times and indefensible on any grounds except those of partisan warfare. You may save a few thousands of dollars by withdrawing the fast mails, and might ap¬ pear to save more by returning to the old stage-coach system of transportation, but you cripple the postal service, and entail a loss di¬ rect and indirect on every business man who values quick dispatch and to whom the ?ery earliest information has become a vital neces¬ sity. You may call this economy, and may argue on this floor that it is, but when you return to your constituents you will discover that you have committed a blunder that can¬ not be excused or justified on any grounds of public necessity. True economy consults public interests and may often be found in the increase rather than in the diminution of public expendit ures. By refusing to appropriate sufficient money for the proper care of our navy-yards, arse¬ nals. mints, custom-houses, and other public buildings that constantly need to be watched and repaired, you actually waste the public funds, for you entail upon subsequent years expenditures that would be unnecessary if a proper sum had been appropriated to care for and properly guard the property of the Gov¬ ernment. The sailor who fails to stop a leak when he first sees it may discover when too late that his folly and neglect have cost him a ship. Is it economy to refuse sufficient appropria¬ tions for the rivers and harbors scattered all over this broad land which can easily be made navigable by a reasonable expenditure, unless in the same bill you incorporate useless and reckless expenditures on “creeks that will not swim a duck,” and where the engineers report that the first thing necessary is a steam-pump to pump up the" water to start a river? And yet this is the character of economy we have seen practiced in this House where the democratic party is in power. I do not claim that republican legislation is perfect, that errors have not been committed; but I do claim that it stands ready to punish its dishonest officials, correct its errors, and that the American people can with far more confidenee intrust the administration of this Government in its hands than to turn it over to democracy. Again, we are told that reform is necessary in the civil service, and are further informed that— Experience proves that efficient econom¬ ical conduct of the governmental business is not possible if its civil service be subject to change at every election, be a prize fought 6 for at the ballot-box, be a brief reward of party zeal instead of a post of honor assign¬ ed for proved competency, and held ror fidelity in the public employ. Does democracy practice what it here preaches? Can it be claimed that the republi¬ can officials, many of them wouuded ex-Fed- eral soldiers, who were removed by the ma¬ jority of this House, were less efficient than the democrats who were appointed to their places? If they were as efficient why were they removed? Everybody knows they were removed because they were republicans. Had they been democrats they would have been retained. I refer to the radical changes made in the employees of this House since democracy controlled it simply to show that the democratic Solons of St. Louis differ very widely from the democratic Solomons here assembled, or St. Louis was insincere in its pretensions. I prefer to believe the lat¬ ter, for a close observation has convinced me that democracy is about the same everywhere; it believes in democracy, it surrounds itself with democracy, it makes war on anything or everything that appears hostile to democracy. If offices should be held by men as a re¬ ward for competency, as a post of honor, for fidelity in the public employ, why did the official ax decapitate men of tried ability and known integrity in this House. Why was it used so fiercely when Tilden replaced 'John A. Dix, and swept the State of New York of republican officials? Why is it that in every State, county, town, or city, where democracy controls the appointments that none but democrats are found in office ? The answer is plain. It is simply because it is the policy of the party to surround itself by its friends; and in the full glare of this policy the reform alluded tc Ui the St. Louis plat¬ form seems to be as much out of place as a prayer-meeting would be in Tammany Hall. Again allow me to exclaim : “Humbug, thy name is democratic reform.” xnere may be abuses which have crept into the civil service, but these can be corrected without destroying the party that has built up a civil service which is as honorable and as efficient as any in the world. To say that “the first step in reform must be the people’s choice of honest men from another party,” is to say that the only way to stop a leak is to destroy the ship and build another; or, to make an illustration more applicable, to de¬ stroy a vessel that is known to be staunch and seaworthy and to replace it with one that is believed to be worm eaten below the water¬ line and badly damaged above, and likely to go to pieces with the first blast of the ele¬ ments . Yes, reform is necessary, and always will be until the end of time; but how is it to be brought about ? Our plan is to select the very best men in the republican party, point out where reform is needed, and let them do the work, and bring to 6wift and certain pun¬ ishment all dishonest officials. What is the democratic plan ? We have it announced in the platform. “Reform can only be had,” says this oracular piece of timber, “by a peaceful, civil revolution.” Ominous words. The last attempt of a large portion of this same party at revolution was not “peaceful,” though they promised in the beginning it would be. It failed; and now the same por¬ tion is to try the virtues -of a peaceful revo¬ lution. Will it succeed? First let us ask, should it ? Is there anything in the present condition of public affairs that would justify a revolution of any kind, peaceful or other¬ wise ? Our national policy is a good one. Our for¬ eign relations arc satisfactory. We are in the enjoyment of peace abroad and, with the exception of our Indian troubles, peace at home. Democracy a§ks for support on the grounds that it has accepted the results of the war and the amendments of the Consti¬ tution as binding. If this is so, why the ne¬ cessity of a revolution to bring out reform, when every measure of the republican party is in exact accord with the changed condition incident to these results and amendments? What is the meaning of revolution? It is something more than a change for the better, it is a complete overthrow of existing affairs, and whether it comes in the shape of poli¬ tics or war it leaves in its track a desola¬ tion that can only be justified by the plea that it was the last resort of an oppressed people. Webster says in defining the term, “a revolu¬ tion in politics is the consummation of a re¬ bellion or revolt against the established or ex¬ isting government.” Is this “peaceful revo¬ lution” which the democratic platform tells us is the only means whereby reform can be brought about “the consummation of a rebel¬ lion or revolt against the established or exist¬ ing government?” If it is, then indeed the people should be informed of its character, and forewarned that its object is to secure by peaceful revolution what an armed rebellion failed to secure by the sword. If it is to be a revolt against the established Government, under the cover of politics, who that loves his country can hesitate in deciding on which side he belongs ? Revolution is distasteful in any form to the American people. Whether peaceful or war¬ like they will accept it only as a last resort. That contingency has not yet arrived, nor will it as long as patriotism and loyalty remain in power. I have an abiding faith in the good sense of the majority, and I feel assured that whatever reform is to be brought about will be inaugurated by the party that has defended the nation in its hour of trial and guided it with unparalled wisdom through eleven years of peace. The voice of the people will be heard in November through the ballot-box, not calling democracy into power, but in a full, hearty indorsement of the republican party and the patriotic work that it has performed. The ballot has not yet failed us, and never will as long a6 patriotism, loyalty, and integrity are the ruling elements in the land. On the bal¬ lot we rely for the vindication of our work and the purity of our motives. It is the true reformer that brings about improvement with¬ out revolution and corrects all wrongs without exciting rebellion or revolt. When its voice, denouncing democracy and 6ham reform, shall be heard, the revolutionists of the land will be forced to acknowledge that— There is a weapon surer yet And stronger than the bayonet, A weapon that comes down as still As snow flakes fall upon the sod; But executes a freeman’s will As lightning does the will of God. Statement showing the Receipts and Disbursements of the Government from January i, 1834, to June 30, 1875 ; exhibiting also the amount of defalcations and the ratio of losses per $1,000 to the aggregate received and disbursed, arranged in periods, as nearly as practicable, of four years each, and also in the periods prior and subsequent to June 30, 1861 ; prepared under the direction of the Secretary, to accompany his answer to a resolution of the United States Senate, dated February 9, 1876, calling for a detailed statement of balances due from public officers no> longer in the public service, which have arisen since 1830: Receipts, Losses and Ratio of Loss per $1,000 to Aggregate of Receipts. % ? * Includes receipts for loans. Disbursements, Losses and Ratio of Loss per $1,000 to Aggregate Disbursements. c . in o ^ in ^ w r^vo Q vo On tv.vo h in o CN 0 On S' VC M ° 8 CO CN M ON H M fOHHHM w rt- M cm ^ O J! ■w* H %% co oo h m m in o* co cn m , 'C \C co rf •*■ in in -rt-co Ov in m o C/5 VO H covo 0 On 0 O vO co mco O mm ^mT't m tj-tn On On in H CN 00 VO NO_ m,cO m m CO co o o M H H H 00 ^ON^O CN m HH h o h C > » h cn On ro 00 cn m ■6^ M CN m CN CO v* rooo in H CN vo vO CN t^co in h rt- 4-* 0 rt-m re> ert m 0 O 0*000 00 CN VO ^ On moo co CNCO vo C On m rt* in O vo 't n oo onc^^cn co VO CO 00 P ovco rrt co ^oo m trt.co owe C^ in m J£ coo O cn 00 vo n m OO rt- VO O VO ts Ov m h m w t^vo m c^. on CO rt- rt- 3 oo oivo h roromooovo -*■ CO H CN o’ 0* vo vo 00 in rt- cooo O co CO CN M m m cn co cn m rt- m on 5 •m. •-■ CO ^ CN ►3^ vO ON Cv CO H H 00 VO CO tWO H tV rocoo co^ COOO Ov h o M N N'O moo o m VO M 8 1/5 1/5 O VO M mvo vo m m m CN CN O rt co M 6v cn h tv m cn tv"rt*cb — CN OWO Os O VO ON rt CO i moo tvco No ro t^'O 00 VO On CO w CO rs in C rt in on mvo : o' h qvocT cTvo m m cn" H HVO COCO m N IN OV H O M OV co CO CN Cv CO M **k vS CO CO rt o rt* o o CO ON oo tv vo" vo m m CN CN G o E o in u P *0 im s vn o o 0 0 tv c< 1003 ov m Qv C^*vO rt-COrt-H rt* t^> o CN ON o vo 0 rt- ro co co co ro onOO rt- in rt- mvo vo m o h mvo h in ■+ Cn ro m ■t O rt- co h com On m On ro rt N cn' m Ov moo t>. On 0.00 h cn cn vo co rt- c^ CN 0 CO U-) O -tcnrOH MCO 0 On cn cn rt* m m h rt- co on m m rt* HM mihMHMCNH rt- tn. p-t vo CO O O m on ON m Cv On On On cn vq cn M CO tv tv >* > < 55 c . ° 8 $ ° O M co rt tv in m cn On co h O O in m h rtoo rt rt rtoo m in 0 * M ■ N CO CO N CO CO CO fv m CO rt rt CN n v w •8 p rt fO CO OV tVGO (N 't (N CO N On CN ON vo 00 VO in ^ o vo tv invo hvo co m 0 On cn rt O 0 rt OnvO on 0 h co cn vo tv rt cn cn vo rt m invo rt onvo co H 't in h n co onocT c" vo" h o m m rt tvco tv on co cn CN M M H CO M O H tv tv tv CN CO cn" tv in i VO CO On 0 vo CO ON M VC tv in co oo M co G v E V Ov OV CM ON t''* CO ro rn CN 00 Onvo co h H VO M O H H •SP *A ■** co ONOO CO m t^sOO m ON On 0 vO CO CO oo oo m co 0 co rt- mvo cooo Ov m rt- 3 rt ■rH +3 fl o o I w -t-s fl o a © K XI ta © +3 c3 M © Pi hL b£ o +3 o o o rH <&■ u © p. to to o Pi Cm o -u as « T) P w ro 0 ) ro ro O •> ro fl CD a © ta Pi P X to c . uv vo Ps mi- l-vo eo H oo 0 VO dv CM 00 ° S m m co co vo oo Ov rt- rt* rt* cn m 0 tv H r/5 n 8 n - 0 h o oo tv mv© H M CN M O H & « h M-^-OCMOOI-CMM t^OO H 00 o oco - vo vo in ov h -r-oo CN ov m bj C/5 <0 n« ovn b inn h «<» oo in -i-vo Ov vo CN CN o t^vo fiHHcocoovo^m Ov tv CN in C^ ro Ov ro CM in -J- cm Ov Ovvd 0 vo Ov ro m oo c^ ov Ovoo -1- VO m in R W O VO vo o •4 y a m X mJ M 00 H t~- M-vo CM vooo 0 co CN^ m ov hcvmmmmcmvomm V* CN CN cn dv WA «A 1A Ov-l'-t*C^-t‘VOOVCM O O m mr 3 C/5 4-» MCOCMlOHVOCOCMMOvCO o m in < 1003 M o co vooo M Ov Ov Ov CN H ' c CM co 0 O Ov t-^vo c-M invo M tv o »vo On h Cv QV OvOO H MM-c-movOvt'-ocoino 1 in C/3 HVO rt O 00 'O 00 CN H H H m o O M H CN H H Om mJ % Wb fc M "CO CICO -J-CI M rvoo M 00 M tV o 0 co -i-oo vo vo m ov h -i-oo CN ov m M cm n; VOCOCMOVCMCMincNMCMCO oo in -tvo ov m cm cm -i- o m 00 cn m > CN CN O r^vc CM-McocoovocMm Ov tv CN C/3 . P W n cp Ov cn ci' in P cm' dv OvvcT o" vo cv cn m co c^ ov ovoo -i- VO •N «V m in vo vo o h3 u M m co m c-- -t-vo cm moo o m CN m cv r5 Oh hcNhmmhCNvOhh CN CN CN Ov M Ho *A J*&r N_> H M M rt-vo co m Ov o CN N oo cn oo mvo rt- r>vo co cn CN J cm in 0 rt < C in t> cm voco n-r^o -ism CN vO vo H * O O cn O J' H CM HVOCCJMCMH CN m h N M »—1 ^ •SA >6A vo vo vo rt- 0 mvo m rt* O m OO 00 O tvvO 4 inco -i- cm c» 0 i-vo c^vo vo m w cm VO ov Cv M VO 00 00 t>sVO O ov 0 rt- cn t^-vo movN CN cv CN u 00 O tv Pi cm HD 00 VO in Ov M CM -f CM c^ Ov m m rt- o cn m ci cm cm o’ cm cn t-T tM. P Cv vo" m ij h m moo owo h m 00 tv M o CN H MM « m rt V* H 3? co t>*o h rt* o rt- m m ov m CN IS1 M CvCM -f PNN-t OWO 0 00 tv 0 o c Hi - m m rn vo cn vo oo m rt- Ov o h r^s in owe 3 M rt-vo rG h oo oo vo vo 0 vo co m rt- m I Ov dv Ov ,2 h m m m cn rt* m rt-oo o vo 00 00 Ov P VI M rt- H CN I m >1A C . O Q 1 -incM -i- m m ci mi-tvm m M CO cm o cm ^ in ovoo oo 0 tv cm vo m tv o M vo 0 cn t'svo cn cn r^oo ov m m cn Ov 00 rt- O ^ h ov rt- cn h M p*^ MA *A m N CN rt* rt- H VO m CN rt-VO VO Ov tv O 1- CM + Nh OsOO 03 Ooo in Ov m C/3 . rt-vo cn cn m rt* m m vo moo tv vo o cm in m mvo oo oo moo m vn -i- vo CN rt o V H m rt- CN tv o tv CN H Ol CN rt CO VQ w cm 5 vnoo vocvcmi-mOOcv VC VO ov z < O o co o vo owo m h oo -i- h O m rt- p S2 rt- 0 tv oo oo oo h o rt- m Vi i •. •> *. M H QV •» A CN M MM 0 tv CM mJ M 1A U C/3 tvvo mmo m m mw tvov tv tv O cm 4-* 10 tNO tv co owo CM m vo CN rt- a two cn tv in two rt-vo mvo VO m m V tv moo tv av 0 cn rt- m rt* ov CN 0 CM E OOVCMOOVWOOOOOCMCM tv m rt O h cn m m Ov cn cn m vo cn cn cn tvvo cm CM tvmmOvCM 0 -1* CM COH C 00 M p P •s Ov m m h co m inn ov O l>VVUUV t- ,u eCCCCCCCC O 0 m m t> 03 • 3 C Q C « « §33333333 K W Pi oooooooo° 2 S £3 ° W*oo N m Cmo t'- h in vovc |SI|« © 3 S & ® *3 tii p § Jfj-S oo c: ^ a S?Sa g §s ^ 5 2 1 «s 2-5 a O ^ P -H 2 o’ 5 o f 3 .2 S-3S85 jc g =S«^ a ® ^ o £ >£ £i p w ® © V, 2 * m ^ o h ra I S)* 2 C-< o *rt OQ C Ct o “ .2 2 S . .2 o s p -h 3^5 S 00 g XS «« * »||’2-§5

M Ss ► PO ^ *S « a> «, 5 |S|-I 1 t -<2 g^js C rrj ^ —rt 00 (Pv-5 O a5 o* 1 -- u o .»3 ” rt 8 o 3 a 2 S p g ^ 2 £ ° ,0 3§»o-5S n fl J 3 c r 2 0) *2 *j ft) o P,rG (t_, t-'>rt-rt ^|i!« .•aS83eJ* »o » oi^ mk ; a £ ®2 ^ 5 < Km g «£ < 4) ® ^ . p«isa-: ■5 « t, 5^3 < |S O «S-p p S t P (Prt M I